Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EOS Digital Cameras 
Thread started 24 Nov 2013 (Sunday) 21:55
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Priority IQ over everthing else in DSLR

 
monkey44
Senior Member
Avatar
726 posts
Likes: 15
Joined Jul 2003
     
Nov 24, 2013 21:55 |  #1

Read lots of threads here, lots of opinions about DSLR and all the digital benefits of each. Am ready to buy an upgrade - currently own 30D ... most often shoot with 100-400 IS "L" and a 28-135 (and others)... I may also buy a new lens at the short end, depending on the camera I buy as well..

FF vs Crop has no priority for me - I shot for years with film/slide at 35mm - so, familiar with FF and shot for years now with D30 and 30D as well ... For purposes of this thread, I see little distinct advantage of one over the other for my work product. I can adjust to either one in the field with minor limitations and understand completely the relationship between AV, TV, ISO, etc.

What I don't understand well is the digital technology aspects of all the new cameras, and it changes so fast it's difficult to keep up if you've not 'grown up' with it ... and I've not grown up with it. I primarily used the D30 and 30D more or less like a film/slide SLR ... adjusting between AV and TV and ISO as needed to capture the images - mostly outdoors - wildlife and outdoor sports (well, basketball too) -- (OK, anyone bored yet?)

But, am now considering upgrading to the level of 7D ($$), 6D ($$), 70D ($$) 5D Mark III ($$$) ... it seems price is similar (under $3500), but the technology differences between them baffles me completely ... Not so much the technology itself, but what it does for the Image Quality under identical conditions in the field.

So, which one gives the best image quality after cropping and enlarging - assuming we are in the field, relatively stable good light, and need distance shots (sports moving - wildlife moving) --

In general, the subject will be small and some distance away - can't help that. Therefore, needs cropping to 'size' subject into the image and cut the surrounding background. Final product - publication in magazines (less up-sizing here) but also larger printing for particularly engaging shots (Smile here) -- (as in 16x20 photo prints, or larger poster prints) ... so the initial capture under those conditions is different than studio work, kids playing, or general journalism ...

As I'm more or less winding down my professional career (always freelancer, not editor paying overhead) I'd like to stay away from the 1D costs - if possible. I've thought about going back to film/slides for awhile as the tech issues become so complex - but as you all know, the costs of film/slide processing is high, and the luxury of 'take as many shots as you want' versus the 'set up a few shots' and take what you get and find out if you're successful two or three days later ... Well, almost a no-brainer ...

I don't care even one small tidbit about "movable view screen, WIFI, or Video" not in the least, and would dump it as an expensive 'toy' component if I could, and put the money into image quality instead.
But I really dislike the movable screen and the 'extra goodies' ... would like the manufacturers to develop a real solid image-only producing DSLR, and dump the extras if I had any input.

So, which is it - Image Quality the main priority ... (And, I suspect 'reach' comes into play, and that's why the question may be more complex than simply "a cropped sensor" gives the reach, but the subject moving comes into play as well. ... or, maybe "cropped sensor" and "processor speed" is the simple answer. Sorry this is so long - but it needs it, I think, so the answer stays focused ... :)




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
I ­ Love ­ Cats
Senior Member
269 posts
Joined Nov 2013
     
Nov 24, 2013 22:27 |  #2
bannedPermanent ban

I think if pure IQ is your motivation, you have no business even considering small formats like APSC or FF digital. Your minimum requirements should be something like a Pentax 645D, or Mamiya 645DF. Either will make the output of FF look like P&S by comparison. I am assuming your first objection will be the cost of such systems. If that is the case, you are not "Prioritizing IQ over everything else." Clearly money is more important that IQ at this level. If not, then by all means, go with medium format.

With that out of the way, I don't believe you'll see 2 cents worth of difference between what you can do with a 1DsIII, 5DII, 5DIII, 6D or 1DX, with the proper technique, appropriate lenses, and lighting. I am not even sure FF will be differentiable from APSC, if both are shot properly. I've seen lots of amazing 20"x30" prints from the 7D. There is way more to IQ than the method of capturing the light.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
David ­ Arbogast
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
11,472 posts
Gallery: 36 photos
Likes: 8261
Joined Aug 2010
Location: West Point, Georgia
     
Nov 24, 2013 22:54 |  #3

I Love Cats wrote in post #16477764 (external link)
I think if pure IQ is your motivation, you have no business even considering small formats like APSC or FF digital. Your minimum requirements should be something like a Pentax 645D, or Mamiya 645DF. Either will make the output of FF look like P&S by comparison. I am assuming your first objection will be the cost of such systems. If that is the case, you are not "Prioritizing IQ over everything else." Clearly money is more important that IQ at this level. If not, then by all means, go with medium format.

The OP's context was well-framed clearly prioritizing IQ within the world of DSLRs, so there's no need for the medium format lecture. ;)

With respect to Canon DSLRs, my sense is that the 6D offers the most image quality prioritized body. Image-wise it is at least as good as the 5D III and 1DX, but lacks the extra features like the advanced AF system or premium build quality. In my view, though, the best IQ prioritized DSLR is the Nikon D800 (as well as the D610). They may have some shortcomings, but image quality isn't one of them (within the limited world of DSLRs cameras.).


David | Flickr (external link)
Sony α7R II | CV 12mm, FE 12-24mm, Loxia 21mm, Loxia 35mm, Sigma 35mm F/1.2, Loxia 85mm, Batis 85mm, Batis 135mm

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Gobeatty
Senior Member
513 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Aug 2013
     
Nov 24, 2013 23:11 as a reply to  @ David Arbogast's post |  #4

I agree with David.

"If that is the case, you are not "Prioritizing IQ over everything else."

I believe cost is a resource constraint as much if not more so than a feature to be prioritized. Within the DSLR budget, he wants IQ to be top priority.

I also agree the 6D or Nikon equivalent gives best quality for the price. If shooting lots of moving subjects, then the 5DIII is a great way to go. It's a true all-rounder with same IQ as the 6D. If reach is an issue and you are having to crop even with the extra reach of your crop sensor, and since you say light is usually good, the crop 7D or 70D would be a nice step up from your 30D and may be a better choice than the FF cameras.


6D | 35 f2 | 50 1.8 | 85 1.8 | 28 - 135 f3.5 - 5.6 | 70-210 f4

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gtrag94
Senior Member
273 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Aug 2011
Location: Fort Wayne, IN
     
Nov 24, 2013 23:28 |  #5

RAW files don't seem to change over the years, all of the tech goes into getting better jpegs. If you shoot RAW, then the features seem to be the place to spend the money (better AF of the 7D or 5D3 for instance). In a studio, I'd venture to say that every camera looks the "same." Sure if you look at 100% crops, you'll see tiny differences, but that's it. Studios are not demanding environments. Basketball is pretty demanding. Anything you buy will be better than your 30D. The new 7D due out sometime early-mid 2014 may be a good option.

Summary: all IQ is pretty close under equal conditions. Sports is probably best with a 1D Mark IV ($3000-3500 used), wildlife is probably best with a 7D ($800-900 used) (only because of the extra crop/reach), 5D3 ($2500-3000 new) is a great all-rounder but you lose a good bit of reach. If you like the 5D3 but don't care about AF or fps or build, then 6D is much cheaper. All of these cameras are amazing!

The 5D3 (and I believe the 1D4) has a nice feature where, in Av mode, you can set the aperture, set Auto ISO, and it will maintain a certain minimum shutter speed that you set (no longer 1/focal length). In other words, if you're using a 35mm lens, instead of the old Auto ISO that would give you a shutter speed of as low as 1/30s, you can set the min to 1/250s and the ISO will always maintain the exposure the meter calls for. Point it at a bright area and the ISO goes down, dark area, the ISO goes up! Awesome. Exposure comp as necessary, but usually you need a certain SS, f-stop, and you don't care about the ISO.


Fort Wayne, IN Portrait & Wedding Photographer
http://www.craigagapie​photography.com (external link)
http://www.facebook.co​m/CraigAgapiePhotograp​hy (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
monkey44
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
726 posts
Likes: 15
Joined Jul 2003
     
Nov 25, 2013 00:55 |  #6

I Love Cats wrote in post #16477764 (external link)
I think if pure IQ is your motivation, you have no business even considering small formats like APSC or FF digital. Your minimum requirements should be something like a Pentax 645D, or Mamiya 645DF. Either will make the output of FF look like P&S by comparison. I am assuming your first objection will be the cost of such systems. If that is the case, you are not "Prioritizing IQ over everything else." Clearly money is more important that IQ at this level. If not, then by all means, go with medium format.

With that out of the way, I don't believe you'll see 2 cents worth of difference between what you can do with a 1DsIII, 5DII, 5DIII, 6D or 1DX, with the proper technique, appropriate lenses, and lighting. I am not even sure FF will be differentiable from APSC, if both are shot properly. I've seen lots of amazing 20"x30" prints from the 7D. There is way more to IQ than the method of capturing the light.

Well, I was pretty clear about which cameras - not all cameras in the world. and asking about IQ in these under the same field conditions - of course, change the light / shade, changes everything, And you reference FF cameras - so, that may have a priority for you in your experience. But capturing light is not the issue - it's the lack of detail that light 'exposes' with the distance shots - have no problems with closer in shots - we all get those closer in beauties - but it's the 'small subject' in distant setting that's not cutting it - it's the challenge at the moment.

What's more interesting to me - Some shots at a very great distance will crop and enlarge into a very nice and detailed image ... but some seem to get to a certain size, the lose detail dramatically as it gets slightly larger (even in good light) That's a little puzzling to me, but I'm not very tech smart - so can't attribute it to anything specific. Could be something in digital grading, HA could be the photographer, although the sudden degrading of the subject I suspect is more due to technology.

Also, another tidbit - I like the 18-135 lens too, and that limits me with choice - NO 6D ... but in general, I was thinking either 7D, or 70D for cost - but considering 5D M III if anyone jumped in here and said it was a great image quality jump - but I read some state 'slow focus' , so not great for the sports (my other work-half) - I'd spent that extra to get a great jump in image quality, but if I can get it without, then I will - I doubt I'd make the jump to ID level - just leaves the wallet too flat.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
apersson850
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
12,114 posts
Gallery: 7 photos
Likes: 335
Joined Nov 2007
Location: Traryd, Sweden
     
Nov 25, 2013 01:07 as a reply to  @ gtrag94's post |  #7

A 1D Mark IV can limit the setting range for shutter speeds and aperture values, but that's more intended to prevent you selecting something you don't want.
It may work for the shutter speed when you are using Av mode (I don't know - haven't tried that on any such camera), but the specific "longest allowed exposure time" setting, intended to be used in conjunction with automatic ISO setting, isn't available on the 1D Mark IV. It takes a 1DX for that, or the 5D Mark III mentioned above.


Anders

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
dscri001
Senior Member
487 posts
Gallery: 3 photos
Likes: 105
Joined Dec 2011
Location: Virginia Beach, Virgina
     
Nov 25, 2013 02:38 |  #8

David Arbogast wrote in post #16477823 (external link)
The OP's context was well-framed clearly prioritizing IQ within the world of DSLRs, so there's no need for the medium format lecture. ;)

With respect to Canon DSLRs, my sense is that the 6D offers the most image quality prioritized body. Image-wise it is at least as good as the 5D III and 1DX, but lacks the extra features like the advanced AF system or premium build quality. In my view, though, the best IQ prioritized DSLR is the Nikon D800 (as well as the D610). They may have some shortcomings, but image quality isn't one of them (within the limited world of DSLRs cameras.).

But aren't the 645's dslr's? ;) Joking aside, I agree that from op's list of camera's the 70D will give the best from aps-c and 6d/5d for full frame. The technology behind IQ lies within the different sensors and processors. I've only had the 7D and 6D so I can comment on the two. I saw a marginal increase in the quality of the raw output from both. Of course 6D had more range and much better iso capability. The biggest difference is how much I could push/pull exposure with out seeing a loss of detail. This also includes heavy cropping.


-Tyler I II
EOS 6DII, EF 16-35mm f/4 ISL, EF 35 f/1.4L II, EF 85 f/1.8, EF 70-200mm f/2.8L

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
dscri001
Senior Member
487 posts
Gallery: 3 photos
Likes: 105
Joined Dec 2011
Location: Virginia Beach, Virgina
     
Nov 25, 2013 02:50 |  #9

Here's a quick example of heavy cropping and not losing much detail in low light. Might not be the best but it was the quickest one I could find. It's about a 100% crop and yet it still retains detail in the afterburner. You can even pick out some detail in the nose of the aircraft, which you would think be just a black shadow. I have been in this situation with the 7D and had a lot of trouble controlling the grain and noise in the shadows. I would never use these images for anything but was surprised how much detail was retained.

IMAGE: http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5546/11045711344_9c87afdf48_z.jpg

IMAGE: http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7441/11023527993_4c694d26b9_z.jpg

-Tyler I II
EOS 6DII, EF 16-35mm f/4 ISL, EF 35 f/1.4L II, EF 85 f/1.8, EF 70-200mm f/2.8L

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
eddie3dfx
Senior Member
486 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Sep 2009
     
Nov 25, 2013 03:59 |  #10

monkey44 wrote in post #16477972 (external link)
Well, I was pretty clear about which cameras - not all cameras in the world. and asking about IQ in these under the same field conditions - of course, change the light / shade, changes everything, And you reference FF cameras - so, that may have a priority for you in your experience. But capturing light is not the issue - it's the lack of detail that light 'exposes' with the distance shots - have no problems with closer in shots - we all get those closer in beauties - but it's the 'small subject' in distant setting that's not cutting it - it's the challenge at the moment.

What's more interesting to me - Some shots at a very great distance will crop and enlarge into a very nice and detailed image ... but some seem to get to a certain size, the lose detail dramatically as it gets slightly larger (even in good light) That's a little puzzling to me, but I'm not very tech smart - so can't attribute it to anything specific. Could be something in digital grading, HA could be the photographer, although the sudden degrading of the subject I suspect is more due to technology.

Also, another tidbit - I like the 18-135 lens too, and that limits me with choice - NO 6D ... but in general, I was thinking either 7D, or 70D for cost - but considering 5D M III if anyone jumped in here and said it was a great image quality jump - but I read some state 'slow focus' , so not great for the sports (my other work-half) - I'd spent that extra to get a great jump in image quality, but if I can get it without, then I will - I doubt I'd make the jump to ID level - just leaves the wallet too flat.

I understand what you mean when you talk about crop. I recently was going through my wedding photos to create the album. The 70-200 ii is so sharp, I was able to crop out part of the landscape of family members walking from far away, as if they were much closer and it was the original shot. I don't own that lens, but It's extremely impressive.
I think this is more of the lens than anything. Seems to me the sigma 30 is the same way as well, with just an incredible amount of sharpness that does not go away when you crop part of the photo.

Here is just a shot I took at my wife's families event. (6d -25/105)

IMAGE: http://imageshack.us/scaled/thumb/34/lv9t.jpg
IMAGE LINK: http://imageshack.us/p​hoto/my-images/34/lv9t.jpg/  (external link)
IMAGE: http://imageshack.us/scaled/thumb/11/w2tn.jpg
IMAGE LINK: http://imageshack.us/p​hoto/my-images/11/w2tn.jpg/  (external link)

Canon 6D, Canon L 24-105, Zeiss Distagon 28mm 2.8, Planar 50mm 1.4, Planar 85mm 1.4, Sonnar 135mm 2.8 & Zeiss Mutar 2x, Canon 50mm 1.8
http://www.edwinraffph​otography.com/ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
palad1n
Goldmember
Avatar
1,771 posts
Gallery: 9 photos
Likes: 2413
Joined Jun 2013
     
Nov 25, 2013 04:28 |  #11

7D has better reach, which IMHO compensates the better crop quality of FF.
i don´t see this as a major advantage of FF compare to crop cameras.


Website (online) : www.lukaskrasa.com (external link)
Flickr : http://www.flickr.com/​photos/105393908@N03/ (external link)
Facebook page: https://www.facebook.c​om/lukaskrasaphoto/ (external link)
Instagram: https://instagram.com/​lukaskrasacom (external link)
Lukas

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
David ­ Arbogast
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
11,472 posts
Gallery: 36 photos
Likes: 8261
Joined Aug 2010
Location: West Point, Georgia
     
Nov 25, 2013 08:47 |  #12

monkey44 wrote in post #16477972 (external link)
Also, another tidbit - I like the 18-135 lens too, and that limits me with choice - NO 6D ... but in general, I was thinking either 7D, or 70D for cost - but considering 5D M III if anyone jumped in here and said it was a great image quality jump - but I read some state 'slow focus' , so not great for the sports (my other work-half) - I'd spent that extra to get a great jump in image quality, but if I can get it without, then I will - I doubt I'd make the jump to ID level - just leaves the wallet too flat.

With the lenses you are using I think a 7D or 70D is probably a better fit. I can say that this summer I purchased a 7D with the hopes of gaining extra reach, but found that it came up short against my 5D III even when I used extenders (which degrade image quality) to compensate for the 5D III's reach deficit. This was my comparison scenario:

7D with 500mm vs. 5D III with 500mm + 1.4x
7D with 500mm + 1.4x vs. 5D III with 500mm + 2x

In each case I discovered more/better detail on the birds I was capturing with the 5D III, even though the 5D III's image quality was being reduced by the extender. The extender not only degrades image quality from the additional glass, but it also makes the lens a stop slower necessitating higher ISO. So, I was impressed with the image quality gains offered by the 5D III - even with one or two hands tied behind its back, it still outperformed the 7D in image quality (real-world shooting).

But, I don't say any of that to criticize the 7D. While I prefer the image quality of the 5D III over the 7D, it is incremental: it's a noticeable difference, but not a "night and day" difference.

For your needs - given the lenses you're most interested in using - the 70D does look like the current best-fit. I think it's possible - even likely - that Canon will announce a 7D II in 2014. If you're willing to wait, it might be interesting to see if there is an announcement in the first quarter of 2014.


David | Flickr (external link)
Sony α7R II | CV 12mm, FE 12-24mm, Loxia 21mm, Loxia 35mm, Sigma 35mm F/1.2, Loxia 85mm, Batis 85mm, Batis 135mm

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
lovemyram4x4
Goldmember
Avatar
2,198 posts
Gallery: 97 photos
Best ofs: 3
Likes: 57
Joined Mar 2013
Location: Temecula
     
Nov 25, 2013 11:45 |  #13

monkey44 wrote in post #16477972 (external link)
Also, another tidbit - I like the 18-135 lens too, and that limits me with choice - NO 6D ... but in general, I was thinking either 7D, or 70D for cost - but considering 5D M III if anyone jumped in here and said it was a great image quality jump - but I read some state 'slow focus' , so not great for the sports (my other work-half) - I'd spent that extra to get a great jump in image quality, but if I can get it without, then I will - I doubt I'd make the jump to ID level - just leaves the wallet too flat.

I'm not sure about what you read on slow AF on the 5DIII. There was a lot of people complaining about how slow the AF was when using the 600 RT AF-assist beam(myself included) but they improved that with the firmware that came out earlier this year. For action(and everything else) the 5DIII has one of the best AF systems, currently you'd need to go 1 series to get better(the 6D is spec'd for center point being a bit more sensitive in low light-both can focus in extremely low light).

From what you've said in this and your other thread it sounds like you'll be cropping a lot even if use a crop senors body, if you're doing this more often that not I still think you should stick with the 70D.

Aside from not having quite as much customization settings for AF as the 7D(like zones). The 70D is sounding like it's AF system is probably out performing the 7D. It also has improvements in IQ and ISO performance(mostly in jpegs but still some for RAW) and greatly improved AF in live view.

apersson850 wrote in post #16477986 (external link)
A 1D Mark IV can limit the setting range for shutter speeds and aperture values, but that's more intended to prevent you selecting something you don't want.
It may work for the shutter speed when you are using Av mode (I don't know - haven't tried that on any such camera), but the specific "longest allowed exposure time" setting, intended to be used in conjunction with automatic ISO setting, isn't available on the 1D Mark IV. It takes a 1DX for that, or the 5D Mark III mentioned above.

Yes the 1DIV's has a full functioning min/max shutter and aperture unlike the crippled system on the 5dIII and 1DX. Not only can it set a min but also a max and not just on shutter(also not limited to only 1/250) but also aperture and it works in all modes/ISO not just in auto ISO. The 1DX's up coming firmware update will improve some of it's crippled areas, hopefully the 5DIII will also get these updates soon after.

I use it often for Av/Tv modes(like for birds with varying light, so I can set DOF and a min shutter fast enough to stop quick bird movements(same can be done with Tv but min/max aperture is set to get proper DOF). I also use them for M mode(or for the manual side of any of the semi-auto modes) as apersson850 said to prevent me from selecting outside of a desired range.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Alnitak
Member
152 posts
Joined Jan 2007
Location: Texas
     
Nov 25, 2013 12:30 |  #14

5D or 6D if IQ only is the criterion. No sense considering crop if money isn't a concern. Crop is mostly for birding/wildlife and for those of us who want FF but just can't swing the price differential for the 5D3 and extra focal length of the big lenses necessary to make up for the loss of "zoom" that switching to FF entails. I'd never get a crop if IQ was my single overrriding requirement.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
amfoto1
Cream of the Crop
10,251 posts
Likes: 84
Joined Aug 2007
Location: San Jose, California
     
Nov 25, 2013 12:52 |  #15

You cannot make IQ your only consideration...

First of all, upgrading to any of today's cameras will be a big jump in IQ from your 30D. You'll be going from 8MP to 18MP and from 12 bit to 14 bit (that's an increase from tens of thousands of colors to hundreds of thousands or millions, in case you aren't aware). When I upgraded from 30D to 50D one of the first things that was apparent to me was the cropability of the 50D's images (is cropability a real word? I dunno, but hopefully you get my drift). Where I used to have to fill the 30D's viewfinder with the subject and keep cropping to a minimum, I now could easily change an image from, say, 8x12 horizontal/landscape to 8x12 verical/portrait, with at least as good and often better IQ. That's greater than a 50% crop, yet the 15MP, 14 bit images held together well enough to make excellent prints. I made many a 16x20 or larger from them, too. Also, with the 50D about one stop higher ISO was possible... now using 7D, it's about two stops higher than 30D. With 7D I'll use ISO 3200 without much concern, 6400 with some extra post-processing work. What are your ISO limits with 30D? 800? Maybe 1600 max? Between 7D and the much newer 70D with the slightly higher resolution sensor, IMO the jury is still out but the 70D seems to offer slightly cleaner high ISO images (not enough to make me switch, though).

You will also enjoy some other significant improvements. The rear LCD is bigger and bright enough to be a lot more usable. Self-cleaning sensors can be a biggie, too. My two 7Ds are over four years old and have about 100,000 clicks on each. They have not been pampered in any way, often are used in rather dusty situations. I don't worry much about changing lenses whenever needed, I just use normal precautions. One of my 7Ds has never had a sensor cleaning. The other got it's first cleaning just recently. I can compare that with my old 30Ds, which I found needed a sensor cleaning about every 3 to 6 months at a minimum and often more frequently, shooting the same subjects in the same locations with the same lenses. In other words, the self-cleaning sensors of the newer models (all the ones you mention) really seems to work.

Since you are still using a 30D, you also seem to keep your gear for a while. So durability might be a consideration. I forget exactly, but I think 30D were rated for 100,000 clicks. And I am not entirely sure, haven't seen any Canon statements about it, but I think 70D and 6D probably are too. 7D is rated to 150,000 clicks. I think 5DIII is, too (5DII was). 7D and 5DIII simply "feel" like more pro-oriented cameras. They have more metal construction, 100% viewfinders, and are generally better sealed against dust and moisture (though no Canon DSLR is entirely waterproof!). In fact, a 7D weighs a little more than a full frame 5DII, is only a few grams lighter than the 5DIII. Both 70D and 6D use more plastic, less than 100% viewfinders and are a bit lighter. The 70D has an articulated rear LCD (which can be handy for high an low angle shooting... or video), which makes it a bit thicker and adds some weight. Not that this means they are necessarily much less durable... plastics sometimes survive impacts better than metal. 6D and 70D enjoy 97% and 98% viewfinders, respectively, an improvement compared to the 95% of your 30D.

With any of the newer models you'll see improved AF. The 6D is perhaps the "weakest" of the bunch, but still better than your 30D. The 70D and 7D appear the same, but aren't quite. 7D has a couple focus modes the 70D doesn't, and also uses a discrete chip to run AF (1D series style). However the 70D has a newer and much more powerful processor, and it's got a better/more sophisticated AF Micro Adjust system (something you wouldn't know about yet, coming from 30D... Micro Adjust basically allows you to fine tune AF accuracy for a bunch of your lenses... up to 20 on 7D, up to 40 and better for zooms on 70D). The 5DIII has the most sophisticated AF system of all the cameras you mention, it's actually very similar to the 1DX's AF system (and the 5DIII is priced accordingly). Both the full frame cameras are better able to focus in low light (ratedto -3EV, approx. moonlight), which matches well with thier higher ISO capabilitied. Compare that with -0.5EV rating for your 30D, and -1EV for 7D and 70D.

Still, overall the 7D's or 70D's AF would be a very significant upgrade over what you have now. 30D has a nine-point AF system, with only the center one the more sensitive "dual axis" type. 6D has an eleven-point system, also with only the center one a dual axis (though the remaining ten single axis points will outperform the single axis points in your 30D or even my 5D Mark II). The 7D and 70D both have nineteen AF points, all of which are dual axis type, though the center is still more enhanced "diagonal" type. The 5D Mark III has the most sophisticated AF of all, a 61-point system, up to 41 of which can act as dual axis type.

You also say "subjects are small and far away" and "sports with movement, wildlife with movement". And you cite the 100-400 as a frequently used lens on your 30D, along with 28-135 (among others). This suggests me your emphasis is on longer lenses, telephoto work. If that's the case, you'd likely be best served sticking with a crop sensor camera. For max IQ, you could do better with a FF camera, but you'll have to complement it with considerably more expensive lenses to get the same reach. Instead of your 100-400, you'll need a 600/4 IS, so be prepared to spend upwards of $10,000 US on a lens. You'll also need a rock solid tripod to put it on, since it's nowhere near as portable and handholdable as your current tele-zoom. A quality tripod with a gimbal head will set you back around $1500 US.

Suggesting medium format digital cameras is just plain silly... But the responder's point was that if pure IQ is your only consideration, than those would be the ideal choice. However they'd be terrible choice of camera for what you appear to like to shoot (not to mention incredibly expensive!)

Because of your subjects and the lenses you cited, I'd think a full frame camera wouldn't be the best choice either (unless you just won a lottery and really enjoy lugging around big, heavy gear).

Stick with the crop sensor cameras, I have to strongly recommend.

For your purposes, I think it comes down to a choice between the recently introduced 70D and the four year old 7D. Either would work well for you. In some respects, the 7D is superior. In other ways, the 70D is. The 7D is arguably a more "pro-oriented" camera. It lacks any of the "Scene Modes" you'll find on the Rebel/xxxD and many of the xxD models, including the 70D. Instead the 7D offers three user programmable modes (70D has one). If you are a RAW shooter who regularly post-processes your images, applying your own adjustments, sharpening techniques, etc., the 7D is likely to be more ideal. If you are a JPEG shooter who want's relatively finished images straight out of the camera, the 70D might be a better choice. The 7D is a bit more durable and solid feeling camera. The 70D has a slightly different control layout (no "joystick" for example... it uses a multi-switch instead). You might want to go to a store and handle both 7D and 70D, to help you decide.

Either 7D or 70D will be a big upgrade from your 30D and D30 days, I can assure you. There will be some learning curve with them, a lot of new features to get accustomed to and tweak to your own preferences. But the end results will be quite good, even if not purely the best IQ available.

Oh, and I do suspect the 7D will be replaced with a Mark II model in the not-too-distant future... But it's anyone's guess when that might be (my guess is Spring 2014). It's even murkier what changes it might see. Some things are predictable, while others aren't. The 70D was just recently introduced and is likely to be offered for at least 18 months or longer.


Alan Myers (external link) "Walk softly and carry a big lens."
5DII, 7DII(x2), 7D(x2) & other cameras. 10-22mm, Tokina 12-24/4, 20/2.8, TS 24/3.5L, 24-70/2.8L, 28/1.8, 28-135 IS (x2), TS 45/2.8, 50/1.4, Tamron 60/2.0, 70-200/4L IS, 70-200/2.8 IS, 85/1.8, Tamron 90/2.5 Macro, 100/2.8 USM, 100-400L II, 135/2L, 180/3.5L, 300/4L IS (x2), 300/2.8L IS, 500/4L IS, EF 1.4X II, EF 2X II. Flashes, studio strobes & various access. - FLICKR (external link) - ZENFOLIO (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

2,363 views & 0 likes for this thread
Priority IQ over everthing else in DSLR
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EOS Digital Cameras 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is avanrooyennz
1056 guests, 317 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.